The Glenwood Springs City Council approved a ballot question to renew and increase the city’s street tax during its regular meeting Thursday.

The question put before voters on the November ballot would determine the fate of the city’s infrastructure fund. The resolution setting the ballot language passed 6-1, with Councilman Jonathan Godes voting no.

The city’s existing street tax expires in December 2026. It was passed in 2015 and is collected as a half-cent sales tax. The tax is used to fund the repair, reconstruction and maintenance of existing streets, alleys, curbs, gutters and sidewalks, as well as the repair, replacement and maintenance of underground utilities such as water and sewer lines.

Glenwood Springs Community on the Move, an ad hoc committee of the Glenwood Springs Chamber Resort Association, has worked with the city to recommend ballot text to extend and increase the sales tax.

Based on the city’s 20-year plan to maintain and rebuild all streets and underlying infrastructure, the committee recommended that the City Council place a measure to increase the sales tax to one cent on the November 2024 ballot.

The measure would double the existing half-cent sales tax for the next twenty years, with 25 percent of the revenue earmarked for underground roadworks and 75 percent for above-ground works (a distinction not provided for in the existing tax).

In Colorado, all tax increases under the state’s TABOR law must be approved by voters. For TABOR purposes, the city set $5 million as the maximum amount it could raise in the first year of the tax extension, which would begin in 2025. The $5 million only takes into account the projected amount raised by the additional half-cent, not the entire tax combined.

“The city has to estimate what the tax could bring in,” Mike McCallum, chairman of Community on the Move, told the Post Independent. “And they’re significantly over the amount, because if it’s less than that, they may have to figure out a way to refund it. Imagine refunding a portion of the sales tax to every visitor we’ve had this year.”

The increase would increase Glenwood Springs’ current sales tax rate of 8.6% (which is the sum of state, county and city sales tax rates) to 9.1%. Glenwood Springs already has the highest sales tax rate in the county; Rifle, New Castle and Parachute have rates of 8.15%, 8.2% and 7.65%, respectively. Compared to neighboring municipalities, however, Glenwood’s sales tax would still be lower than Snowmass (10.4%), Aspen (10.3%) and Vail (9.4%).

The increase to 9.1% would also put Glenwood Springs in the top 6% of communities with the highest tax rates.according to a written comment from local resident Gary Vick, who made a public statement at the meeting.

“There are (14) cities of over 200 cities in the state that exceed 9.1% by this calculation… Many of these cities are resort towns that don’t offer much compared to Glenwood,” Vick wrote.

“This is not a wishful thinking request from our community, but an absolutely necessary ballot question to ensure funding for our local roads and underlying infrastructure,” McCallum said in a presentation to the city council.

A May poll “showed strong support” for a one-cent sales tax, according to a recommendation letter from the Committee on the Move to the City Council. About 67 percent of the 216 people surveyed voted yes.

“This approach is popular with voters who want a comprehensive solution that includes not only road repairs but also replacing aging infrastructure such as water and sewer pipes,” the letter said.

Dispute in the Council over an expiry clause

Community on the Move recommended putting a 20-year sunset clause on the ballot, which would allow the tax to be recalculated and adjusted to meet future needs “to prevent indefinite taxation without community consent.” Sunset clauses are tax laws that expire on a specific date.

“If we were to reach out and explain that there is a concrete end date, we could get additional support,” McCallum said. “I think if we told everyone that this is a perpetual ‘forever tax’ that we have to pay, we probably wouldn’t get any votes.”

McCallum added that in the 40 years since 1981 that Community on the Move has helped push through ballot measures believed to be helpful to the community, almost all of them have expired.

“It gives people a chance to think again and say, ‘How have you handled this tax in the past? Have you done a good job?’ If not, they may not support it. If we have, they will probably support it,” he said.

City Councilwoman Erin Zalinski said the annual budget will be published and made available to the public, along with information on how the funds are used.

Godes said he disagreed with approving a tax suspension, citing the opinions of pollsters such as the Colorado Polling Institute and Magellan Strategies.

“They say it doesn’t matter, it’s a political non-factor,” he said. “Community on the Move won’t be around in 15 years when we have to go back to community, or in 30 years… That’s not something I want to repeat… Not when there’s no studies or evidence that it even matters.”

Mayor Ingrid Wussow and City Councilor Sumner Schachter responded to Godes’ statement by reiterating their confidence in Community on the Move’s recommendation and pointing to the organization’s nearly 100 percent success rate at sunsets.

Advantages of a voting measure

In its letter to the City Council, Community on the Move cited several reasons for supporting the measure, with the most important reasons being sustainable budgeting and shared responsibility.

“A dedicated one-cent sales tax enables sustainable budgeting. It is the only stable, dedicated and reliable source of revenue for roads and long-term planning and implementation of critical projects, avoiding piecemeal funding or emergency response,” the committee’s letter states. “At only one cent per dollar spent, the cost is minimal. Both residents and visitors who enjoy Glenwood Springs share in the responsibility, so the burden is not on locals alone.”

McCallum added that tourists and non-residents would pay more than half of the fund, which he considered fair to residents.

“Sales tax is paid by everyone who stops in town and spends money,” he said. “There are very few ways to raise revenue to maintain the roads, and that could be property taxes or sales taxes… With sales tax, a lot of that is paid by non-residents, which helps us. And they should, because they use the roads, they use the water and sewer system.”

In a follow-up email to the Post Independent, Vick argued that assuming tourists would pay more than half of the fund would still not reduce the financial contribution of local residents.

“We also tax ourselves. A large portion of Glenwood’s citizens pay our sales tax. It is not appropriate to impose a resort-style tax structure in Glenwood when we are not, in fact, a pure resort community,” Vick wrote.

The city’s support for the tax stems from the need for “significant repairs and improvements to ensure safe movement for pedestrians, bicyclists and vehicles. This includes improved drainage facilities, water quality improvements in the storm sewer system, and improved and upgraded water and sewer facilities within the rights-of-way,” Resolution 2024-25 states.

“If we want to have streets that better serve our community and aren’t full of potholes and aren’t falling apart, then we need the money to do that and do it well,” said Councilwoman Shelley Kaup. “The current funding is just not enough to do that.”

If voters approve, the tax dollars would be used exclusively for existing roads and underlying infrastructure (meaning the funds could not be used for new roads like South Bridge, according to McCallum). The campaign for the ballot question is being led by members of Community on the Move.

“The goal is to truthfully communicate and educate the critical need, benefits and costs of maintaining our roads and underground infrastructure,” the letter said.